November 2, 2011

[A] routine bill... turned controversial when Rep. Peggy Krusick of Milwaukee offered an amendment to remove race as one factor for a scholarship program that serves disadvantaged college students....

Krusack, by the way, is a Democrat. And the argument ended with approval of her amendment, 57-34. All the Republicans and none of the other Democrats voted yes. The vote on the bill has yet to occur.

Before all that happened, the Assembly passed a bill adopting the "castle doctrine," which presumes the use of deadly force against intruders is reasonable.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm has said Wisconsin, like most states, doesn't need a castle doctrine because current law provides more than adequate protection for anyone legitimately acting in self-defense. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joe DeCecco said that strangers occasionally enter the wrong homes accidentally if they're confused or drunk.

"Shouldn't there be some minimal effort required to assess the situation or call police before firing?" DeCecco asked.

People need to lock their doors. Are drunks really wandering into the wrong houses around here? Yes, it would be awful if some homeowner with a gun blasted away some confused drunkard, but are there really people who stand ready to shoot intruders but don't lock their doors? If the door is locked, you don't get the drunk wanderer, so what is this important circumstance DeCecco is worrying about?

but are there really people who stand ready to shoot intruders but don't lock their doors

There are very few absolutes in the world. Having a 100% success rate at making sure every door in the house is locked every night before you bed down is not one of them. Aside from that, what about 8pm, just after dinner for you and your family, but also enough time for a drunk to wander home from a prolonged happy hour somewhere. Is your door locked at 8pm?

That's all much ado about nothing, though. As someone who's faced a knife-wielding intruder, I'm not really concerned about calling the cops after they're already in the house. It's life or death at that point.

The castle doctrine is simply the intellectual heir of our traditional notion of property rights and limited government. It should really not be that controversial. William Pitt gave voice to it as such:

"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!" -- William Pitt, Earl of Chatham.

There's always a boogeyman circumstance. Reminds me when Texas passed their CC law ages ago. NPR was worried that people will be shooting each other over parking spaces at Walmart. "Running gun battles" was one phrase I remember hearing somewhere.

Of course its only anecdotal, like the stupid argument in the first place, but if you look at news reports of "drunks" entering the wrong house and getting shot stories, you notice that the excuse is thin and the "drunk" often violent.

As a firearms owner, I'm pretty goddamned sure no armed homeowner would blithely load, aim and fire his/her weapon without assessing the situation. As to whether there is time to call the police, as Instapundit puts it so well, "when seconds matter, the police are only minutes away."

I'm conflicted on this one, on the surface I think it's a good law.In today's economy there are poverty stricken people of all races. On the other hand it's documented that poverty among minorities is higher.

As to whether there is time to call the police, as Instapundit puts it so well, "when seconds matter, the police are only minutes away."

I generally come into the house, go straight to the vault, and lock up my pistol. I have three small children in the house, but I doubt I'm going to act any differently when they're older.

When our break-in occurred, I was in the basement (where the intruder broke in, luckily) and on the opposite end of the house from my vault. There was absolutely no time to call the cops. Had I been taking a nap at the time, the intruder would have made it past me and into the baby's room which is where she said she was going.

I got very, very, very lucky in the manner it went down. If anything like that were ever to happen again, I would not confront as I did in that case, but instead retreat to the bedrooms and my vault. I put myself, stupidly, within arms reach of a very long, very sharp knife. As I said, I got very lucky.

With doors locked, you could get the "drunk wanderer," turning the knob. Knocking for his wife to come out. And, of course, if he "drove" to your house ... he could also try to put a key in the locked door.

When the racket starts, those with guns, reach for them.

Being drunk and confused is no excuse.

Besides, just hearing the shot of gunfire, can bring momentary sanity to a drunk.

And, then there's the other question, if the driver was driving drunk, and weaving ... why wasn't he stopped by the cops?

My wife used to take the position that since she grew up in the country, and nobody in her family ever locked their doors, she would not lock our doors.

She ran out of the house one day and hopped on her bike to go to work at about 6 pm to pick up some papers she needed to complete a task at home. She returned 15 minutes later to find a burglar walking out of our house.

No one would argue that the speed limit should be reduced to 10 mph on all roads because that would save lives.

People realize that deadly car accidents happen, but accept the risks. The same is true here. A deadly accident may happen (far less often than traffic fatalities), but defense against home intruders should not be curtailed as a result.

No one would argue that the speed limit should be reduced to 10 mph on all roads because that would save lives. People realize that deadly car accidents happen, but accept the risks.

Milo: I understand that my opponent supports the 55 M.P.H. speed limit.Opus: Saves 500 lives a year! I fully support saving lives.Milo: Then he'd support the saving of another 10,000 lives by lowering the limit to 40 M.P.H.Opus: 40?Milo: Or to 20 ... Saving 30,000 lives a year.Opus: Gee... 20 is pretty slow.Milo: Apparently my opponent would send 30,000 men, women, and children to fiery, mangled deaths just so he can zoom along to his manicurist at 55.Opus: I DON'T HAVE A MANICURIST!Milo: He probably doesn't. Most mass murderers don't. Hitler didn't.Opus: Stop it! Stop It! STOP IT! (bangs on podium)Milo: Rebuttal?Opus: (frazzled) What?Milo: Give your rebuttal.Opus: Uh... Bush is a wimp.

"On the other hand it's documented that poverty among minorities is higher."

So, what's the problem? That means more "minorities" will honestly qualify for the scholarship. Why should someone whose parents make $200,000 / year, but who happens to have darker skin, be eligible for a "disadvantage" scholarship? Why should they get that scholarship, rather than someone whose skin happens to be lighter, but whose parents make $25,000 / year?

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)Robert Heinlein was right about polite societies

1) As a Charter member of “J”’s WiccanSatanistMorman Shekelmeister Club, I think it is fairly obvious that I am not a liberal, even if not a doctrinaire Conservative.2) That quote is patently, and self-evidently FALSE….To wit:a. South Central LA;b. Camden NJ;c. Somalia;d. Baghdad, Iraq 2002-07; ore. Tripoli LibyaA “well-armed society” is a well-armed society, no more or no less. A society’s “politeness” depends on a host of other things, not the state of its armament.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)Gun laws and repealing scholarships, by the way, is part of the special "jobs session" from the WIGOP that has yet to bring up a jobs bill

Garage, this may come as a surprise to you, but as a rule, GOVERNMENTS DON’T CREATE JOBS. You might as well discuss how the Prostitutes have not produced a Sexual Abstinence Course for High Schoolers.

Governments can COST jobs, but not create them. They can foster a climate that encourages or DISCOURAGES businesses, but the jobs are NOT a product of government. I realize to your Liberal/Progressive Keynesian perspective this is an “ungude fact”…but it is still true, nonetheless.

"I generally come into the house, go straight to the vault, and lock up my pistol."

And the breakin you had shows that your protocol could perhaps be improved.

In my case, in addition to the "safe" where the rifles are locked up (scare-quotes because it's not really a safe, just a locking steel cabinet), I have a pistol-sized one in the bedroom. The pocket pistol goes in my pocket when I get up in the morning, and comes out again when I go to bed at night. Because it's a polymer-framed .380 (Kel-Tec P3AT) it's no more of a burden to carry around than it was, back in the old days, necessary to carry around a cell phone and a palm pilot.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)Robert Heinlein was right about polite societies

1) As a Charter member of “J”’s WiccanSatanistMorman Shekelmeister Club, I think it is fairly obvious that I am not a liberal, even if not a doctrinaire Conservative.2) That quote is patently, and self-evidently FALSE….To wit:a. South Central LA;b. Camden NJ;c. Somalia;d. Baghdad, Iraq 2002-07; ore. Tripoli LibyaA “well-armed society” is a well-armed society, no more or no less. A society’s “politeness” depends on a host of other things, not the state of its armament.

Heinlein was probably positing a society of families and homes.

Joe speaks to societies of savages.

There was an old saying in the British Army, "The savages must be made to have respect for the law". Therein lies the dichotomy.

As to the other bill discussed, about scholarships, I agree, as someone has touched upon, why should Melia, or Sasha, or Jesse Jackson’s “Love Child” or Spike Lee’s son, get a scholarship, based on being disadvantaged, whilst Bubba and Noreen’s son or daughter, is NOT eligible?

I want to know the ratio of confused/drunk people wandering into strangers homes vs. the number of real intruders encountered by homeowners. I strongly suspect this confused/drunk scenerio is a red herring.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) THEN WHY CALL IT A JOBS SESSION! Do gun laws create jobs

No. They don’t. I assume it’s a “Jobs Session” because:1) The General Assembly will be examining Taxation, Workers Comp. or regulation; OR2) Republicans, in Wisconsin, being politicians, feel-erroneously- that they too, can CREATE JOBS.The delusion that government can create jobs spans many parties and a number of political-economic theories and persuasions.

The Legislature can remove race as a factor all it wants. They can add in the most punitive "we mean it" language. It won't matter.

The administrators that actually award these scholarships, with unspoken winks and nods between them, will continue to follow their quota system.

It's like this. They get in conference. One administrator will vigorously defend a borderline or unusual candidate. The others will know what that means, and go along. Each administrator will be given an informal quota of unusual candidates to defend. There will be no written proof of collusion, but they will all know what's going down.

Every year, the informal quota of unusual candidates that each administrator is allowed to defend will ratchet upwards.

The only way to prevent this corruption is mandate only numerical metrics, i.e. GPA and SAT.

To qualify, the students must first show financial need and then show they are a member of a minority group, a first-generation college student, handicapped, or a current or former prison inmate. Minority students are defined as those who are African American, American Indian, Latino, or Hmong.

Many rural students are just as disadvantaged (or more so) and would be unfairly discriminated against because they were not one of the favored groups (aka white kids).

I used to help students and parents fill out the FAFSA forms and due to the depressed economies in rurals area, many qualified for aid.

The only fair way is to treat all students the same for government programs that are funded by all taxpayers dollars. The government should be blind to anything other than financial need in these types of grants.

If there are scholarships set up that want to discriminate on the basis of race, handicaps, religion or ethnicity, then that is their prerogative. It is private money and they can do with it what they will.

If there are scholarships set up that want to discriminate on the basis of race, handicaps, religion or ethnicity, then that is their prerogative. It is private money and they can do with it what they will.

Sorry, DBQ. I cannot accept such an uncomplicated and workable plan such as the one you describe above because Love says you're a hateful woman.

But that's exactly what I'm advocating for. It's not that my home, or my area, is remotely dangerous, it's not. It's that--by definition--any kind of breakin will be totally unanticipated.

And that's the point, too, of calling attention to the size of the implement--if your only carry piece is a full-sized 1911, no wonder it's not something you want want to do at home! In my case, the .380 is with me literally all the time, and it gets conceptually demoted to "backup gun" whenever I put on something more capable.

But that's exactly what I'm advocating for. It's not that my home, or my area, is remotely dangerous, it's not. It's that--by definition--any kind of breakin will be totally unanticipated.

I realize that and I know guys that do that. Two things I'll probably never do. Carry at home all the time and walk around day to day with a round chambered. Both of those decisions admit they're not perfect, but I'm erring on the side of caution.

If you need a weapon for self defense, you certainly aren't going to have the leisure to run to the gun safe, unlock it, load the weapon and then defend yourself. It is too late by that time.

Since the break in I have two vaults, one for each level. Hardly inaccessible. Both contain a loaded weapon and a flashlight. Both are minivaults with spring-loaded doors opened with finger-combo locks. No dithering necessary.

I can't believe this is the hill Wisconsin democrats want to die on. Even California - California! - racial preferences in education lost to a popular vote.

This morning on the WTMJ morning news program, they had one of the Democrat legislators call in. The reporter asked him why they were opposed to this amendment, and he started talking about helping the poor. The interviewer - obviously reluctantly - pointed out that the amendment really had nothing to do with this, at which point the legislator started blathering about the importance of diversity.

Do the Democrats really think this is persuasive to most Wisconsin taxpayers?

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)Though ScottM is a WiccanSatanistMorman Althouse retard, I will make a few points in his defense, DBQ…please note, HE HAS THREE SMALL CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE. That changes the equation a bit…chance that Zombie Zoe will break in, some non-0 percentage, chance that Child Charlie will play with gun, arguably, greater than odds of Zombie Zoe…ergo the REAL danger is the child with the fire arm, less so Zombie Zoe. So, I can see why ScottM has his fire arms locked away. It’s like many things in life, playing the odds, making a compromise.

If “J” lived next door it might make more sense to pack all the time….

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)are there really people who stand ready to shoot intruders but don't lock their doors In the town where I was born, I’d say a high percentage of doors were unlocked…and a goodly number of folks would gladly shoot you if you walked into their house, uninvited, unannounced, late at night….what’s odd about that? They aren’t mutually contradictory ideas!

Don’t walk into a “man’s house” without an invite, the door being locked or unlocked has no bearing on that advice. An unlocked door is NOT an “invitation” to enter, something that’s not yours.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) I am perplexed by this "need" for people to not lock their doors Do I “need” to tell you not to rape my offspring? Do I need to tell you not to “murder” me. I shouldn’t HAVE to lock my doors!

please note, HE HAS THREE SMALL CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE. That changes the equation a bit

Good point. However, we also a small child (long long ago in a galaxy far far away) and she was taught that guns were not toys and not to touch things that didn't belong to her. But that was us and our child.

We also took precautions to keep the weapons out of reach of little hands. Out of reach of short people like me; too without having to resort to a ladder.

When other people brought their heathen children (joking so that LOVE doesn't think I hate children and puppies) we would lock them away. The guns, not the children or puppies. Tempting though.

So if Scott M thinks it prudent to handle the guns in his house how he wants....I'm all for that.

are there really people who stand ready to shoot intruders but don't lock their doors

We don't always lock our doors at night or all of our doors. We DO lock the business property because it is separate from the house and is full of things that petty criminals would want to steal for easy resale....tools etc.

First: it would take a concerted and purposeful effort to come into our home or even find our property at night. You have no reason to be there at all. NONE.

Second: anyone who was coming to the property at night or after biz hours to visit or for business emergencies (this does happen quite often) would be calling first and would be expected.

Third: you just don't wander around at night unless you do want to be shot or eaten by a mountain lion, bear or someone's guard dog(s).

Thanks RepublicansSo Mad Man has the WIGOP passed a massive healthcare entitlement, instead of focusing on jobs? Have they passed a massive redistributionist pork package rather than address jobs? Have they passed budget in three years? Unless you’re answer is “yes”, “Yes” and “No” I think I might shut up about Republican failures…Oh I forgot, filed legal actions against non-union employers who are seeking to INCREASE employment? Or passed regulations that are forcing 10-20 GIGAWATTS of generation power to close and that will dramatically increase the cost of operation for remaining plants? Have they hindered the development of domestic fossil fuels, whilst funneling billions to bundler-backed boondoggles? If not, I’d say they’re doing better than your side…of course that’s setting the bar pretty low.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)That's my point, Joe. Save your indignation for the tough issues Thanx for informing me that my personal space isn’t worthy of any indignation? Do you tell rape victims the same thing? “Sure it was your personnel space, property and dignity violated, but really was it all that big a deal?”

BTW, I’m not “indignant” I’m simply pointing out that unlocked doors are NOT an invitation to enter…Even vampires know that, that’s why they ask your permission before entering.

"BTW, I’m not “indignant” I’m simply pointing out that unlocked doors are NOT an invitation to enter"

Couldn't agree more (I also fully support the Castle Doctrine; if you break into my house you deserve whatever you get). You shouldn't have to lock your doors, but the fact of the matter is it's a trivial precaution. It ain't on the same level as rape or discrimination.

They argued from 11 PM till 8 AM because of the Left's obsession with blacks. Leftists continually circle the plight of the blacks and continually offer, as their solution, programs and legislation that make blacks more equal. More equal than who? Whites. Who must be punished by being treated less than equal ostensibly in order to right past wrongs. In reality the gleeful punishment of whites is the obverse of the obsessive love of blacks in the Left's cosmology. But love is probably the wrong turn. The Left fastens on blacks obsessively in some kind of ecstasy of masochistic self-laceration. And we have to pay the price.

It was a place where a criminal element was armed, but the common man was disarmed by law.

(Similarly for the other examples, especially those of insurrection and civil war.)

"An armed society" in Heinlein's use is one where the possession of arms by the average man is commonplace and normal, not one where criminal gangs have arms and nobody else does, or "during a foreign-funded insurrection with suicide bombers".

I understand the little "children aspect". Though I no longer have my own here, there are little grandchildren* around on a frequent enough basis to make it a concern. I think I've got it adequately covered by having the handguns either secured, or on my person. No chance for fiddling there. And since my all-the-time gun is pocket carried (with an adequate, trigger-covering holster, let me hasten to add!) where's the chance for someone fiddling with it?

And Scott,

"Israeli carry" is not something that I'd ever recommend, however: first of all, you didn't ask :-), and secondly the recommendation to not do anything you're not comfortable doing still takes precedence.

----------------------------------*Ahem. This is where y'all say, "Wow, you don't look nearly old enough to have grandchildren." :-)

I have hand guns in hidden holsters in twelve places in my house, garage and yard and shotguns in four additional places. They range from small caliber to large. The shotguns are all 12 gauge. I am never more than 2-3 seconds away from supplemental arms. I also carry a 9 mm Glock in a pancake holster, a .44 magnum in a shoulder rig and two SW hammerless Chiefs Specials in ankle holsters, left and right. We have only had three accidental shooting incidents over the years, none fatal. If have told my grandchildren to leave the guns alone.I don't lock my doors when I am home.

"Israeli carry" is not something that I'd ever recommend, however: first of all, you didn't ask :-), and secondly the recommendation to not do anything you're not comfortable doing still takes precedence.

I was raised on long rifles and shotguns. The whole family is military so I'm very familiar with assault rifles. However, pistols are new to me in just the past couple years. So there's THAT aspect of it. Secondly, I judge for my own comfort and confidence that the two seconds it takes me (having trained so) to draw and charge the pistol aren't going to make that big of a difference between carrying it unchambered versus no carry at all.

The appropriate response to a home invasion is very fact specific. There are some universals.

1. Nobody wants to shoot somebody else. Give 'em one fair warning, if you can.2. If they do not respond to the fair warning by leaving, you must shoot. Do not shoot them in the back.3. Do not shoot to kill. Shoot to as quickly and rapidly as possible disable the threat and collect your family to safety. Once the invader is down, stop shooting.4. Call 911.5. Don't say anything to the police. Let them do their job of collecting evidence. Your lawyer will talk to the police, not you. FYI, police after a shooting are given 24 hours before they have to make a statement to IAD.6. Don't feel sorry for the invader. Be comforted that you did your unpleasant duty, protected your family, and held back the forces of barbarity and chaos.

"(3) The privilege of self-defense extends not only to the intentional infliction of harm upon a real or apparent wrongdoer, but also to the unintended infliction of harm upon a third person, except that if the unintended infliction of harm amounts to the crime of first-degree or second-degree reck-less homicide, homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, first-degree or second-degree reckless injury or injury by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, the actor is liable for whichever one of those crimes is committed."

Surely it is curious that the Statute considers self-defense to be a “privilege” (to be granted or withheld by government) and not a natural right (to be recognized by government)?

Is granting preference to "current or former prison inmates" a perverse incentive, or what??

"To qualify for the Talent Incentive Program, students must show financial need and that they are a member of a minority group, a first-generation college student, handicapped, or a current or former prison inmate . Minority students are defined as those who are African-American, American Indian, Latino or Hmong."

And as for drunks, quite early one morning on Jan 1, we left our house for some ice climbing. Just as we were getting into the car, we heard a noise from the bushes. A holiday reveler who was sleeping it off, was awoken by our activity. He stumbled up to our frontdoor, and started vigorously pounding on it, and shouting incoherently. As his rage increased, he broke down our door, stumbled inside, went to our bedroom, undressed and fell asleep.

Well. In those pre-cell-phone days, we ran down to the 7-11 to call the cops, who came and hauled him away. It ruined our climbing trip, cuz we had to stay home until we could get our door frame repaired.

That guy was sooo lucky that he picked our house. Our neighbors would have shot him dead. His guardian angel was working overtime that morning.

Believe it or not we did actually wake up one morning to a drunk sleeping soundly on our couch. I locked the doors every night - but our teenage daughter forgot to re-lock when she came in for the evening. Funny thing is, when i saw the dog sniffing at the young man on our sofa, i assumed he was a friend of one of our daughters .... after a few minutes i thought to wake the daughters up and ask about the guy they allowed to spend the night. Following a few minutes of confused conversation, we all realized none of us knew who the heck he was or how and when he had come in the door.A poke to his shoulder was enough to make him wake up and run out the door, terrified of US!Harmless and later on a funny story, but yeah, it could have been not too funny if he hadn't been harmless ...And YES, we do live in Wisconsin ... which of course increased the odds he's be drunk ...

I used to live in an apartment behind a funeral home. I had bereaved family attempt to come in the "back door" about every six months or so. This was particularly fun when I was in the bathroom at the time, and I had to yell down the hall that the funeral home rear entrance was the next alley over.

Mind you, this funeral home was much favored by this region's motorcycle gangs, and my semiannual home invasion gets less cute and more alarming in retrospect.

I probably ought to have locked my front door more often, but it's hard to be paranoid when you've nothing worth stealing and living by yourself.